Dubai Telegraph - AI's blind spot: tools fail to detect their own fakes

EUR -
AED 4.316515
AFN 74.63132
ALL 95.340551
AMD 434.884189
ANG 2.103761
AOA 1078.981832
ARS 1629.065029
AUD 1.623627
AWG 2.115651
AZN 2.001714
BAM 1.9505
BBD 2.367956
BDT 144.526701
BGN 1.960623
BHD 0.444291
BIF 3502.468771
BMD 1.175362
BND 1.488449
BOB 8.123893
BRL 5.809337
BSD 1.175701
BTN 111.239286
BWP 15.732188
BYN 3.320165
BYR 23037.085439
BZD 2.364565
CAD 1.601013
CDF 2720.962103
CHF 0.915794
CLF 0.026759
CLP 1053.017944
CNY 8.02813
CNH 8.006568
COP 4351.540889
CRC 536.440191
CUC 1.175362
CUP 31.14708
CVE 109.966218
CZK 24.332745
DJF 209.36027
DKK 7.473066
DOP 70.038084
DZD 155.368674
EGP 61.882552
ERN 17.630423
ETB 183.576136
FJD 2.565823
FKP 0.865797
GBP 0.864214
GEL 3.162383
GGP 0.865797
GHS 13.227005
GIP 0.865797
GMD 85.801212
GNF 10318.919241
GTQ 8.974578
GYD 245.930751
HKD 9.209422
HNL 31.256076
HRK 7.533123
HTG 153.84647
HUF 358.824958
IDR 20362.315269
ILS 3.412786
IMP 0.865797
INR 110.906874
IQD 1539.960385
IRR 1546775.736488
ISK 143.606075
JEP 0.865797
JMD 185.24825
JOD 0.833307
JPY 183.761302
KES 151.860782
KGS 102.750687
KHR 4712.176806
KMF 494.238283
KPW 1057.82946
KRW 1700.965573
KWD 0.36187
KYD 0.979734
KZT 544.428453
LAK 25826.718043
LBP 105283.991858
LKR 376.375773
LRD 215.742901
LSL 19.164747
LTL 3.470537
LVL 0.710964
LYD 7.441844
MAD 10.79497
MDL 20.210003
MGA 4898.669306
MKD 61.591323
MMK 2467.729355
MNT 4207.382242
MOP 9.488878
MRU 46.924305
MUR 54.983004
MVR 18.16523
MWK 2038.652239
MXN 20.260893
MYR 4.613297
MZN 75.106713
NAD 19.164828
NGN 1600.924649
NIO 43.262271
NOK 10.896918
NPR 177.982658
NZD 1.971998
OMR 0.451934
PAB 1.175701
PEN 4.101439
PGK 5.11211
PHP 71.390314
PKR 327.579561
PLN 4.233068
PYG 7195.449713
QAR 4.286055
RON 5.268438
RSD 117.386859
RUB 88.153238
RWF 1719.221502
SAR 4.409748
SBD 9.440807
SCR 16.142244
SDG 705.802097
SEK 10.8373
SGD 1.49074
SHP 0.877526
SLE 28.943299
SLL 24646.738509
SOS 671.871643
SRD 43.971436
STD 24327.610045
STN 24.433509
SVC 10.287006
SYP 130.704545
SZL 19.158863
THB 37.901293
TJS 10.986901
TMT 4.119642
TND 3.416019
TOP 2.829989
TRY 53.151377
TTD 7.967319
TWD 36.880562
TZS 3046.752042
UAH 51.548119
UGX 4420.969266
USD 1.175362
UYU 47.241643
UZS 14196.367585
VES 580.033802
VND 30941.391539
VUV 138.986999
WST 3.200022
XAF 654.176796
XAG 0.015178
XAU 0.00025
XCD 3.176473
XCG 2.118934
XDR 0.818555
XOF 654.179571
XPF 119.331742
YER 280.431257
ZAR 19.253655
ZMK 10579.665595
ZMW 22.25045
ZWL 378.465924
  • RYCEF

    1.0500

    17.5

    +6%

  • CMSC

    0.0950

    22.975

    +0.41%

  • RBGPF

    0.0800

    63.18

    +0.13%

  • GSK

    0.3350

    50.715

    +0.66%

  • VOD

    0.3450

    16.085

    +2.14%

  • NGG

    0.2850

    87.925

    +0.32%

  • BP

    -1.5750

    44.925

    -3.51%

  • RIO

    4.7200

    105.22

    +4.49%

  • BCE

    -0.0150

    24.085

    -0.06%

  • RELX

    -0.4200

    35.74

    -1.18%

  • CMSD

    0.0400

    23.33

    +0.17%

  • JRI

    0.1100

    13.15

    +0.84%

  • BCC

    2.8050

    74.935

    +3.74%

  • BTI

    0.3140

    59.714

    +0.53%

  • AZN

    3.0950

    184.335

    +1.68%

AI's blind spot: tools fail to detect their own fakes
AI's blind spot: tools fail to detect their own fakes / Photo: Chris Delmas - AFP

AI's blind spot: tools fail to detect their own fakes

When outraged Filipinos turned to an AI-powered chatbot to verify a viral photograph of a lawmaker embroiled in a corruption scandal, the tool failed to detect it was fabricated -- even though it had generated the image itself.

Text size:

Internet users are increasingly turning to chatbots to verify images in real time, but the tools often fail, raising questions about their visual debunking capabilities at a time when major tech platforms are scaling back human fact-checking.

In many cases, the tools wrongly identify images as real even when they are generated using the same generative models, further muddying an online information landscape awash with AI-generated fakes.

Among them is a fabricated image circulating on social media of Elizaldy Co, a former Philippine lawmaker charged by prosecutors in a multibillion-dollar flood-control corruption scam that sparked massive protests in the disaster-prone country.

The image of Co, whose whereabouts has been unknown since the official probe began, appeared to show him in Portugal.

When online sleuths tracking him asked Google's new AI mode whether the image was real, it incorrectly said it was authentic.

AFP's fact-checkers tracked down its creator and determined that the image was generated using Google AI.

"These models are trained primarily on language patterns and lack the specialized visual understanding needed to accurately identify AI-generated or manipulated imagery," Alon Yamin, chief executive of AI content detection platform Copyleaks, told AFP.

"With AI chatbots, even when an image originates from a similar generative model, the chatbot often provides inconsistent or overly generalized assessments, making them unreliable for tasks like fact-checking or verifying authenticity."

Google did not respond to AFP’s request for comment.

- 'Distinguishable from reality' -

AFP found similar examples of AI tools failing to verify their own creations.

During last month's deadly protests over lucrative benefits for senior officials in Pakistan-administered Kashmir, social media users shared a fabricated image purportedly showing men marching with flags and torches.

An AFP analysis found it was created using Google's Gemini AI model.

But Gemini and Microsoft's Copilot falsely identified it as a genuine image of the protest.

"This inability to correctly identify AI images stems from the fact that they (AI models) are programmed only to mimic well," Rossine Fallorina, from the nonprofit Sigla Research Center, told AFP.

"In a sense, they can only generate things to resemble. They cannot ascertain whether the resemblance is actually distinguishable from reality."

Earlier this year, Columbia University's Tow Center for Digital Journalism tested the ability of seven AI chatbots -- including ChatGPT, Perplexity, Grok, and Gemini -- to verify 10 images from photojournalists of news events.

All seven models failed to correctly identify the provenance of the photos, the study said.

- 'Shocked' -

AFP tracked down the source of Co's photo that garnered over a million views across social media -- a middle-aged web developer in the Philippines, who said he created it "for fun" using Nano Banana, Gemini's AI image generator.

"Sadly, a lot of people believed it," he told AFP, requesting anonymity to avoid a backlash.

"I edited my post -- and added 'AI generated' to stop the spread -- because I was shocked at how many shares it got."

Such cases show how AI-generated photos flooding social platforms can look virtually identical to real imagery.

The trend has fueled concerns as surveys show online users are increasingly shifting from traditional search engines to AI tools for information gathering and verifying information.

The shift comes as Meta announced earlier this year it was ending its third-party fact-checking program in the United States, turning over the task of debunking falsehoods to ordinary users under a model known as "Community Notes."

Human fact-checking has long been a flashpoint in hyperpolarized societies, where conservative advocates accuse professional fact-checkers of liberal bias, a charge they reject.

AFP currently works in 26 languages with Meta's fact-checking program, including in Asia, Latin America, and the European Union.

Researchers say AI models can be useful to professional fact-checkers, helping to quickly geolocate images and spot visual clues to establish authenticity. But they caution that they cannot replace the work of trained human fact-checkers.

"We can't rely on AI tools to combat AI in the long run," Fallorina said.

burs-ac/sla/sms

G.Koya--DT